civilizationfandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:Mythril Wyrm
Welcome Hi, welcome to the Civilization Wiki! Probably nobody has yet looked at your edit to the Pacal (Civ5) page. It is live already, but you can expect it to be soon reviewed by one of our more experienced editors. *'Now please take a few minutes to get to know the wiki: some instructions, guidelines and conventions are listed at the Civilization:Community Portal page.' *Then please tell us something about yourself by editing ! At the very least, you should tell people which games you play, using a "User Box" or two or more - see Civilization:Userboxes. *When posting messages to talk pages or forum pages, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ That will automatically expand to your user name with a timestamp. *The page is an excellent way of seeing what's being done right now. *For general discussions and questions about this wiki or any game, see the forums. *You also have that you can use, for example, to share stories about your Civ games and the other games we cover. :) Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! Becer (talk) 06:37, February 13, 2014 (UTC) Potential Wikia interview about Civ: Beyond Earth Hello! I was informed about a possibility to ask some 2K folks questions about Beyond Earth and was wondering if you'd happen to have any good ones. See my talk page for details and leave your comments there! —ZeroOne (talk / ) 20:42, May 12, 2014 (UTC) Question Do you have civilization 2 conflicts in civilization. Becuse if you do can you help me edit the scenario section. :I'm afraid I don't. I've only played Civilization IV and Civilization V (and their expansions), hence why I'm focusing on editing the pages for those games. Sorry. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 21:20, May 30, 2014 (UTC) Categories Hello there! I just noticed you edited a bunch of Civ4 related articles (e.g. like this http://civilization.wikia.com/wiki/Ikhanda_(Civ4)?curid=3991&diff=65485&oldid=41735) and added some categories (mainly Category:Civilization IV) to them. I just wanted to point out that it's not at all necessary to edit all those pages individually. Pretty much all of them contain some template, and if you wanted to add a category to all pages about Civ4 units, the only thing you need to do is to edit Template:Unit (Civ4) and add that category there. In the edit I linked to you also added Category:Civilization IV:Warlords, which could also have been automatically added, because the template on that page contains information that the unit was introduced in Warlords. Additionally, I don't know if adding Category:Civilization IV to each and every Civ4 item brings any value at all, since the category would become way too cluttered to be used for navigation or anything else for that matter. The units already belong to Category:Units (Civ4) and that category, in turn, belongs to the Category:Civilization IV. Using subcategories is cool, I don't think everything should be blindly tagged with the main level category. What do you think? Cheers, —ZeroOne (talk) 21:00, June 24, 2014 (UTC) :I think that's a fair point to raise. I noticed that some of the Civilization IV pages belonged to that category while others didn't, so for the sake of consistency, I decided to add the ones that were left out to the category while I made other edits. However, if adding the main level category is redundant and might actually make it harder rather than easier to locate specific pages or information, I'll stop adding it to every page. Thanks for the heads up! -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 21:08, June 24, 2014 (UTC) ::Cool, I'm glad you agree. :) I just noticed that our official instructions for using categories were outdated at best, dangerously misleading at worst. I've now updated the instructions at Civilization:Community Portal, what do you think? ::Also, the Civ4 pages aren't the best place to look at when it comes to categories... The pages were imported from a separate Civilization IV Wiki, which of course did not need any disambiguation in article or category names, so that's why the pages may still carry categories like Category:Units, which shouldn't really be used for anything anymore, except maybe as a parent category for more specific subcategories. ::—ZeroOne (talk) 21:28, June 24, 2014 (UTC) :::Those instructions are much clearer than the original set. With any luck, other editors will read them and heed them so we don't wind up with a bunch of needlessly cluttered category pages. We have a huge repository of valuable information here, and it'll help everyone out if we can make it a little easier to navigate and search. :::Thanks for all you do, good sir! -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 21:39, June 24, 2014 (UTC) Adminship nomination Hello there! I nominated you for adminship at Civilization:Requests for adminship. :) —ZeroOne (talk) 22:11, July 12, 2014 (UTC) :Well, thanks! I'll be happy to serve in whatever capacity I can. :) -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 22:19, July 12, 2014 (UTC) ::Alright, you are now an admin! Just try to Do The Right Thing. :) —ZeroOne (talk) 21:32, July 18, 2014 (UTC) :::Congratulation. Greetings: Makarius (talk) 05:43, July 28, 2014 (UTC) ::::Thank you, thank you! I'm glad to be a (bigger) part of the team. :) -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 18:54, July 28, 2014 (UTC) Empty BNW tabs Hello, I had just noticed you added a redundant tab to a page when I noticed that the page displayed improperly without it. This isn't because the tab there is required but instead points to an issue in the templates themselves. I'm going to assume that this issue has been there for a while and you simply added redundant tabs to the affected pages? I'm going to attempt to fix the template now so the extra tabs can be removed after that. Thanks for trying to fix the issue, in the future if you see a template related issue and you can't fix it yourself please do ask another admin. :) --Becer (talk) 18:56, July 23, 2014 (UTC) :Additinal note, I have now fixed the issue that a user introduced when modifying the template. --Becer (talk) 19:02, July 23, 2014 (UTC) :Yeah, I noticed the issue a couple of days ago and took it upon myself to fix it by manually adding information to the blank tabs. To be fair, a good portion of what I added was redundant, but some of my edits were made to ensure that the changes Brave New World made to the base research costs of technologies or the units/buildings that they unlock would be properly reflected in the templates. Thanks for the heads up, though...I'll be sure not to work harder than necessary to fix the next template-related issue I see. :) -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 19:10, July 23, 2014 (UTC) :Right as long as there's at least one difference between versions the BNW tab is definitely warranted! Keep up your great work! --Becer (talk) 19:13, July 23, 2014 (UTC) thanks :) I was wondering if you could make me a Admin? Hello my name is Jonathan and i have been editing to this wikia for a few years now and i have as many wikia points as you have. I made many new pages this this wikia over my tenure. I was wondering if you could make me a Admin? Promethius20 (talk) 08:35, October 28, 2014 (UTC) :I've seen some of your work, and it's pretty good. However, since I don't have seniority as an admin, I may not be the best person to ask about gaining administrative rights. I'll talk with the rest of the administrative staff, and if they think we need more help, I'll be sure to suggest you as a candidate. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 19:31, October 28, 2014 (UTC) Diseases in Mesoamerica Hello! How can I get rid of the diseases in mesoamerica? kios1949 I´m sorry, I try for the first time to communicate this way. So I surely make mistakes (still playing civ4). -Kios1949 (talk) 14:21, October 28, 2014 (UTC) :I'm not sure which game or scenario you're talking about. If you can give me more specific information, I'll see what I can do to help you. You might also try posting this question in the forum, where it's more likely to get a quick answer. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 19:31, October 28, 2014 (UTC) *Kios1949 Hello, again! *I was playing in CIV4 the "mesoamerica" scenario, where the spanyards come from Europe and bring the diseases to mesoamerica. This weakens the units to 20 % strength. Can I get rid of the diseases anyhow, may be by sacrifying the troups and generate new ones (or any better method)? :I've played a fair amount of Civilization IV, but I've never played that scenario, so I have to plead ignorance here. Try posting your question on the forum (which I linked to in my previous reply) and see if anyone who visits it has an answer. Sorry I can't help you more. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 03:18, October 30, 2014 (UTC) Maya Hi Mythril Wyrm! To make the script work for the Maya page, you must change the data in Module:Data/Civ3/Civs. This is called Lua, and User:Becer and User:ZeroOne are experts on it. Please note that List_of_civilizations_in_Civ3 will have to be changed also, if you change the database Module:Data/Civ3/Civs. Exitwound 45 (talk) 03:47, November 2, 2014 (UTC) :Thanks for the info! I'm still relatively new to this, so anything new I can learn is helpful. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 03:49, November 2, 2014 (UTC) Carrier Hey, sorry about that. I just recently obtained G&K and BNW, and I loaded up an old save which had the old rules, and the Civilopedia said 3 aircraft. Obviously, if I had checked a new save I would have seen the current information. HA! Anyway, I think we need tabs on all the Civ5 units and buildings like we have on the technologies to show their stats in each version of the game. What do you think? Exitwound 45 (talk) 03:17, December 22, 2014 (UTC) :No worries, man. The same change had been made by several other people, who were probably confused for the same reason that you were. :I agree that the Civ5 unit, building, and wonder templates should include the same support for vanilla, G&K, and BNW tabs that the technology template does. It would make formatting of the pages easier and reduce the likelihood of editors changing information that only applies to the most recent expansion/version of the game. I don't know very much about LUA, however, so I might not be the best person to undertake this project (though I'll be happy to help with the page revisions once the new templates are implemented). Do you know anyone who's willing and able to make the necessary changes? -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 03:46, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Copenhagen Hi. It seems to me we have a conundrum regarding Copenhagen. It's no longer a City-State, and therefore I think it should be removed from the associated categories. But is it still a city-state in a vanilla version of Civ5? I can't check. And there's the Civilopedia problem, as usual. Someone has added info, and I can't check it against my Civilopedia because it's gone! You thoughts? Exitwound 45 (talk) 02:29, January 19, 2015 (UTC) :I swear I remember seeing Copenhagen appear in games as a city-state prior to Denmark's introduction to Civ5 as a playable civilization, but I just started a game with both of the expansions and all of the DLC disabled and couldn't find a listing for it in Civilopedia. Sydney, however, was listed, so I guess its introduction in the patch overwrote Copenhagen entirely. :Since it originally appeared as a city-state, I would suggest keeping Copenhagen listed as such, but also keep the qualifier that it was later replaced by Sydney and became the Danish capital. Even from a game standpoint, we should try to stay historically accurate. :) -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 04:15, January 19, 2015 (UTC) Temp Admin Hi, Mythril Wyrm! Just wanted to let you know that Josephseeley has been granted temp admin rights. He's working with us for the Fan Studio project; hopefully this will only be needed for about a month - if you've got any questions or concerns, however, don't hesitate to ask! Best regards, Raylan13 (talk) 03:15, February 18, 2015 (UTC) Stub Template Please stop putting that stub thing to the CivRev2 pages. I have the texts prepared, just need to upload them. Work for you now, more work for me later. Thank you Martin :Very good. Thanks for letting me know. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 16:32, March 13, 2015 (UTC) Vandals Hey, uh, probably shouldn't block vandal's IPs for too long. IP addresses change and might be used by different people. Exitwound 45 (talk) 17:22, March 17, 2015 (UTC) :I see where you're coming from here, but when dealing with a repeat offender (e.g. someone who's made 10+ unhelpful edits in the course of a day), I lean more toward swift preventative action. If we as admins want to make it clear that we won't tolerate vandalism, we may have to mete out some harsh punishments to keep the troublemakers in line. Besides, someone who really wants to make helpful edits to the wiki and happens to share a computer with a vandal can create an account of his or her own for editing purposes. :Still, blocking 93.93.217.66 for a year may have been excessive, so I reduced the block time to three months. It should get the point across without preventing (m)any people from making legitimate edits with this IP. If you still think I'm being too strict or there's an aspect of the problem I haven't considered, please let me know. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 17:46, March 17, 2015 (UTC) ::Nope, you're fine by me. I look at it this way: vandalism is gonna happen regardless, but it's pretty easy for us to fix. I think if their actions are not acknowledged and simply wiped away, it negates most of the gratification they get from it. ::I didn't know that, though: a blocked IP person can create an account to edit with. Exitwound 45 (talk) 00:22, March 18, 2015 (UTC) :::Fair enough. I'm not entirely certain if someone could create an account from a blocked IP address, but I figure that someone who really wants to contribute to the wiki could use a different computer to register and then have more freedom to edit pages. Most vandals - or at least, the ones I've seen - don't have that kind of determination. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 02:42, March 19, 2015 (UTC) are slashes allowed in category names? Will that cause problems? Category:Great Explorer/Industrialist (CivRev) Exitwound 45 (talk) 17:45, March 22, 2015 (UTC) :I don't think so, but I'm not completely certain. If I can find a definitive answer, I'll let you know. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 18:09, March 22, 2015 (UTC) editing.... Do you ever think "My God, this wiki's a mess. How will I ever fix it all?" I do, lol. Exitwound 45 (talk) 04:07, March 24, 2015 (UTC) :Sometimes...but if the biggest problems we're trying to fix at the moment are misused categories and misdirected links, I think that speaks well of both our and our contributors' attention to detail. Positive emphasis, my good man! -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 04:11, March 24, 2015 (UTC) Capital letters - the game vs English grammar rules Greetings & Salutations We de-capped the unit names as they are not proper nouns and, per normal English grammar rules, should not be capitalized in the middle of sentences. If this Wiki wants to follow the game's format, remember that the game capitalizes units when their names are labels. We don't remember seeing the names of units capitalized in the middle of sentences, but if you can, we can go along with that, but it does make this Wiki look unprofessional. (Get back with us about this, please.) DarthOrc (talk) 05:13, April 3, 2015 (UTC) :I get what you're saying here, and as someone who has a graduate degree in English literature and has tutored or taught composition for the better part of 15 years, I agree that the rules we follow are a little counter-intuitive at best. That said, I think that arguing that the game only capitalizes unit names when they're labels is arguing semantics - looking at the icons and reading the pop-up messages or some of the Historical Info sections in the Civilopedia (especially for the scenarios) will reveal that the game consistently capitalizes the significant words in the names of in-game units, whether or not they're proper nouns. It also does the same thing with words like "city" and "encampment," which I intensely dislike and have changed on several pages, so I agree that we need to make exceptions at times. :I do, however, think that we should continue to capitalize the important words in unit names. While it's not mechanically correct, it's consistent with what we see in the game and makes it easier to find references to units in the wiki articles. Besides, if we decided to strictly follow established grammar rules, we'd have to sift through hundreds - if not thousands - of articles just to re-render all of the names from the previous Civ games in lowercase. It's a lot of extra work, and it's inconsistent with both the names displayed in-game and the editorial policy this wiki's users followed while writing these articles. Even if we're not completely consistent with the games (see the "city" and "encampment" comment above), we need to be consistent with ourselves - and if you need further evidence, look at articles in other wikis for games and see how the names of in-game enemies appear. :I hope this makes sense, but feel free to ask for clarification or let me know if anyone else disagrees with this policy. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 14:51, April 3, 2015 (UTC) ::You mentioned Civilopedia - A closer look at articles in it (CivV), such as the one about the Egyptian War Chariot, shows the game uses capitals in the Strategy section but not in the History section. Again, backing up our assertaian that the use of capitals for units, etc. in the game is labeling. We feel it would be o.k. to capitalize units, etc. the 1st time they are used on a page but then allow switching to the more proper lower case afterwards. In any case, we agree that there are better things to do than to go around removing capital letters, but feel that, if we are already there, it is only being efficient to do so on that page. ::Another thing we noticed was duplicate links, which we dislike and remove.DarthOrc (talk) 05:09, April 6, 2015 (UTC) ::p.s. we hope you had a good holiday/weekend.DarthOrc (talk) 05:09, April 6, 2015 (UTC) :::For what it's worth, previously we used to follow the Wikipedia-like naming convention of writing unit, building etc names in lower case. I cannot remember how we arrived to this policy, but the discussion is probably somewhere out there. However, we (well, Becer and I at least) rediscussed the matter around the time when Beyond Earth was released and came to the conclusion that maybe it'd be the best if the page naming conventions actually followed the games' naming conventions. So as a result you'll see different conventions: the Beyond Earth articles have Title Case Names whereas older articles have sentence case names. I'm good with either option as long as there are redirects from one version of article name to the other, but nowadays I tend to agree with following the games' naming conventions. After all, for example, it's a game entity named "War Chariot" and not a historical "war chariot" that we are describing. :::—ZeroOne (talk) 19:14, April 6, 2015 (UTC) ::::Thank you. The last two sentences in particular provide a much clearer and more concise explanation of my position. ::::I'm going to second following the games' capitalization conventions when referring to in-game units, buildings, improvements, promotions, and technologies, and doing the same for new pages henceforth. I support following standard capitalization rules for game concepts and rules, but we can be discuss exceptions on a case-by-case basis. ::::Simply put, I don't think we should fix something that isn't broken. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 21:55, April 6, 2015 (UTC) Deleting edits I know you are admin but Why are you deleting my edits it is making me mad at the Wiki -Indigo76 :While I appreciate your eagerness to contribute, it's important to ask yourself three questions before you add information to an existing wiki article: :*Am I adding important information that isn't in the article yet or makes the article easier to understand? :*Am I putting my information in the proper place? :*Does the information that I'm adding follow the mechanical (spelling, punctuation, and grammar) and formatting conventions of this wiki? :If the answer to all of those questions is "yes," go ahead and add your information; if not, it may be revised or removed by another user or admin. (For example, I undid your last two edits to the City-state (Civ5) article because they contained spelling errors and contained information that was already covered in detail later in the article. I see no reason to add this information again.) :If you want to see some pages that really need work, take a look at the lists of "wanted pages" and article stubs. All of those pages are either nonexistent or incomplete, and would benefit from expansion by you or other helpful Civilization players. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 22:06, April 20, 2015 (UTC)